Ultimate Poker to become first legal, real-money online poker site in US

You have to be physically present within the state of Nevada to play.

On Tuesday, UltimatePoker.com is expected to launch what will become the country’s first fully legal online poker site—with one major catch: it will be limited to those physically present within the state of Nevada. Neither the site nor state regulators have said precisely what means they will use to determine a player's location, but Nevada state officials told Ars previously that it would be far more extensive than simple IP-based geo-location.

“This is an important day for the gaming industry,’’ Ultimate Poker Chairman Tom Breitling said Monday in an interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “We’re the first, not only in Nevada but in America, to offer real money poker in a regulated environment.”

Breitling and other executives will be on a press conference call that Ars will participate in later Tuesday morning, and we will update our story with more details.

"Nevada is now the first state to accept legal, regulated interactive wagers," A.G. Burnett, the chair of the Nevada State Gaming Control Board, told Ars. "It's a big day and I'm proud of the state."

The launch of the new site marks a significant change since April 2011's “Black Friday,” the infamous day in the poker world when federal criminal and civil charges were brought against three major poker sites and their associates, and $3 billion in assets were seized. The government alleged that these sites were in violation of a 2006-era federal law (PDF) forbidding companies knowingly accepting payments for illegal online gambling. As a consequence, nearly all overseas poker sites refuse to do business with players coming from American IP addresses. (Ars will also have a longer feature on online gambling in the coming days.)

A deal’s a deal

Later in 2011, however, the United States Department of Justice released a famous memo (PDF) allowing individual states to authorize and regulate online gambling within their own state borders. Earlier this year, the Silver State’s governor signed such a bill into law—New Jersey and Delaware now also have similar laws on their books, but Nevada is the first to go live with an authorized online gambling site.

The law also allows for states to engage in “compacts,” or agreements with one another, which could create a patchwork of states where online gambling is legal. For now, Nevada’s laws only specifically authorize online poker, while New Jersey and Delaware will include a larger suite of casino games, including poker.

For now though, at least some big-time professional poker players—many of whom have left the United States so they can play in other countries where online poker is already legal—say that the new online games (even including New Jersey) are too small for the time being.

“[I won’t move back to Nevada] until there is enough money and large enough high stakes tournaments running on the sites, which may take years depending on how the laws are structured and how difficult they make it for other states to band together and create larger prize pools,” Matthew Stout, one of the top-ranked poker players worldwide, told Ars. After Black Friday, he moved first to Costa Rica, and later to the Netherlands, just so he could play online poker full-time.

“Think of it like the Mega Millions and other multi-state lottery programs,” he added. “They'd never be able to boast these gigantic nine-figure jackpots if they had to keep all lotteries intrastate. Likewise, there won't be enough money for tournament players to win until the prize pools are large enough.”

UPDATE 1:30pm CT: Ars spoke with Chris Derossi, Ultimate Poker's chief technology officer (and former chief architect of Macintosh system software, leading the design team for Mac OS 7.1), only very briefly described how this would be enforced.

"They include your network [IP address], to the location of your mobile phone device and some stuff that we can't talk about,” he said. "We do require that players have a mobile device that we can locate through the mobile networks."

He clarified that the company was partnering with Locaid, a San Francisco startup that works directly with mobile phone carriers to ping phones as a way to determine their location.

you could play poker online all you wanted; the company just couldn’t pay you.

The UIGEA never prevented site from paying players. Only from accepting payment from players.

Quote:

The Act prohibits gambling businesses from knowingly accepting payments in connection with theparticipation of another person in a bet or wager that involves the use of the Internet and that isunlawful under any federal or state law

you could play poker online all you wanted; the company just couldn’t pay you.

The UIGEA never prevented site from paying players. Only from accepting payment from players.

Quote:

The Act prohibits gambling businesses from knowingly accepting payments in connection with theparticipation of another person in a bet or wager that involves the use of the Internet and that isunlawful under any federal or state law

Well, they could always try to validate the addresses of the people living in Nevada that register there. And that you have to use a legitimate Nevada address before playing. But nah, that would involve too much legwork on their part.

It doesn't seem be limited to Nevada residents only, just that you need to be physically present there. So, using bank account routing numbers won't work as you could easily have an out-of-state bank account and be in Nevada. Along the same lines, linking to your state ID doesn't work if you're a non-resident of the state visiting and want to gamble online. It looks like IP geo-location is really the only way to do this.

It is intriguing how gambling is condemned except when there is a large amount of money in it for the states concerned. It sounds like foreign businesses will still be excluded from offering online services.

Unfortunately it still looks rather like the states which already have large gambling incomes are attempting to protect this revenue from online competition.

The Casinos could open internet poker rooms on-site (on the main floor, or in your hotel room, or in bars, or wherever). This would allow for the verification of physical presence. Some people don't like playing poker in person (often because they have physical tells).

How much of me has to be in Nevada?I'm thinking that if the electric company can sell me "wind generated" power as if I were actually getting electrons from a wind farm then I should be able to send a batch of my electrons to Nevada to play poker.

This is good news for personal liberty, but I don't understand the appeal of ONLINE poker. Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds? There is no work on the part of the player, is that any fun? If you didn't have access to these tools then why would you want to play online because you will be at a disadvantage? I'm honestly asking.

Doesn't "within Nevada only" restrictions kill the whole point of playing Poker online?

Playing online 4 table simultaneously is a lot different than playing 1 table live in a casino. And online games tend to go quicker, giving the full time players who play with safe mechanics the ability to keep a consistent income and potentially high income. So even if you have to live in the state, people will do it.

As mentioned tho is these sites need to be able to pool and operate intrastate, getting players from Nevada against players in Delaware, for any significant prize pools.

It is intriguing how gambling is condemned except when there is a large amount of money in it for the states concerned. It sounds like foreign businesses will still be excluded from offering online services.

Unfortunately it still looks rather like the states which already have large gambling incomes are attempting to protect this revenue from online competition.

There is potentially huge money in regulating online gambling. But I think there is more of a stigma with online gambling addiction than people addicted to pull tabs and lotto tickets.

It is intriguing how gambling is condemned except when there is a large amount of money in it for the states concerned. It sounds like foreign businesses will still be excluded from offering online services.

Unfortunately it still looks rather like the states which already have large gambling incomes are attempting to protect this revenue from online competition.

This is nothing new. Moral issues take a sideline to state revenue. It's part of our nations history, going back to the Whiskey Rebellion.

If it's IP based I'm screwed. I live in Nevada but our (only) ISP provider is from across the border in Idaho and we get Idaho IPs. I hope they don't use IPs as one of the ways to determine location because if they do that would leave out the entire town of Jackpot Nevada. People in this town just might have to walk into a casino to play.

I don't see the point as it stands. But it is a first step to the slippery slop.

Doesn't "within Nevada only" restrictions kill the whole point of playing Poker online?

One would think so, but some people seem to like gambling regardless of presentation or amenities.

I've never been able to understand all the slot machines and other gambling opportunities in shit-stain Nevada locations like truck stops and convenience stores, when there are big flashy casinos just down the road. The odds are the same (you lose, sucker!) but at least at the big casinos you get the peripheral entertainment of the interiors and possibly a free drink or two. If I'm prepared to blow a hundred dollars or so why not do it at some place that puts some effort into it?

It is intriguing how gambling is condemned except when there is a large amount of money in it for the states concerned. It sounds like foreign businesses will still be excluded from offering online services.

Unfortunately it still looks rather like the states which already have large gambling incomes are attempting to protect this revenue from online competition.

Gambling is not condemned by most people in America. it is simply heavily regulated. Just because Las Vegas exists doesn't change that.

And "foreign businesses" do not somehow have some God given or human right to operate a business wherever they like.

Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds?

Yes, programs that not only include odds for the game you're in but also keeps hand histories on each player. You can custom-categorize them as loose, tight, etc. so if you see them in another game you'll have a clue what you're up against. It can also analyze your own play and reveal holes in your game. They are called Heads-Up-Display's (HUD) and are very popular.

Online gambling. The call for fools with money. There can never be any assurance that the software is "fair" unless you are a programmer and can read the source code, and do you really think the company is going to let you do that? It's all rigged. It is a program running on a server, and it is designed to make you lose money.

This is good news for personal liberty, but I don't understand the appeal of ONLINE poker. Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds? There is no work on the part of the player, is that any fun? If you didn't have access to these tools then why would you want to play online because you will be at a disadvantage? I'm honestly asking.

It's not fun if you are trying to win. If you pay for fun you play to lose. To me it was always about relativley easy money. Most people did play for fun - I played to win. It wasn't hard to walk away with $40-60 per hour from small stakes. Small stakes was the easiest to win at as people play very very loose.

You have to learn how each specific player plays; I knew people by username and I knew who was serious and who was just there to burn through his nightly $20. Pretty much everyone not playing for fun was running analyzers that tracked your mathematical odds and yeah you played 4-6 games simultaneously if you wanted to make any money as you folded at least 75% of your hands. It was "work" but easy work.

Online gambling. The call for fools with money. There can never be any assurance that the software is "fair" unless you are a programmer and can read the source code, and do you really think the company is going to let you do that? It's all rigged. It is a program running on a server, and it is designed to make you lose money.

You know nothing about poker.

The house takes from the pot. They have zero interest in who wins.

Admitedly, in one case company employees were also playing poker and cheating.

Thing is, poker is a game of statistics and all played hands are tracked. It's VERY easy to catch cheaters as they tend to be massive outliers.

Well, they could always try to validate the addresses of the people living in Nevada that register there. And that you have to use a legitimate Nevada address before playing. But nah, that would involve too much legwork on their part.

I'm starting a business wherein I will give people a legit street address from which I'll gladly forward mail, and a proxy or VPN or VDI service, for a nominal monthly fee....I'm thinking somewhere in Nevada....

Forgive me if I am confused about why it is OK if Nevada hosts online gambling, but if a foreign country does this it is verboden. Furthermore, the feds will jail the CEO of a company that runs a foreign online gambling organization, even though he just created a means for people to gamble which is legal where the servers are. Are the feds going to prosecute UltimatePoker if people outside Nevada gamble on their servers? I understand this gets touchy from a tax point of view, but past cases were not able to show any tax violations occurred at the corporate level. Personally, I don't gamble at all, but if people want to throw their money away I don't understand how our government has the right to stop them.

This is good news for personal liberty, but I don't understand the appeal of ONLINE poker. Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds? There is no work on the part of the player, is that any fun? If you didn't have access to these tools then why would you want to play online because you will be at a disadvantage? I'm honestly asking.

Yes, there's a spectrum of "assistance" programs out there, and each poker site has its own rules on what is allowed. Typically programs that simply aggregate post-hand data and display trends on a HUD or suchlike (That guy folds 90% of the time preflop, respect him if he gets in) are acceptable; programs that use screen scraping or memory injection to read current-hand info and give advice are not. Similarly, bots are generally disallowed as well. (Of course, the philosophical discussion about what constitutes "cheating" is a different matter altogether.) Even for the acceptable programs, there's quite a bit of skill involved in learning how the info from it can help your decisions. Also, many online poker players play multiple tables at once; ironically, this tends to negate the assistance provided by third-party programs, as there's not enough time for deep analysis.

Quote:

Online gambling. The call for fools with money. There can never be any assurance that the software is "fair" unless you are a programmer and can read the source code, and do you really think the company is going to let you do that? It's all rigged. It is a program running on a server, and it is designed to make you lose money.

The game is designed to make all players, in aggregate, lose money. Highly skilled (or lucky) players can beat the odds, though. Given this, there's very little upside and significant downside for an online casino to rig the games. It HAS happened, but typically it's either a mid-level employee doing something for personal gain (which happens at live casinos too) or it's some tiny scam casino. A major casino won't do ANYTHING that even comes close to damaging their reputation.

Mr. Stout is sugarcoating things. Having a critical mass of players is important for tournaments, yes, but it's also important for following poker's Rule #0: If you want to win money, play with players who are worse then you.

This is good news for personal liberty, but I don't understand the appeal of ONLINE poker. Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds? There is no work on the part of the player, is that any fun? If you didn't have access to these tools then why would you want to play online because you will be at a disadvantage? I'm honestly asking.

Poker is less about "tells" than it is about probability. Sure, obvious tells are an advantage, but they can also be faked to throw people off. Learning someone's betting pattern, however, is a pretty good indicator of what they're holding. That doesn't require being physically present at all.

I'm sure there are companion programs to help you figure the odds, but they wouldn't be as much help in analyzing betting patterns, especially if players are dropping in and out of the game.

This is good news for personal liberty, but I don't understand the appeal of ONLINE poker. Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds? There is no work on the part of the player, is that any fun? If you didn't have access to these tools then why would you want to play online because you will be at a disadvantage? I'm honestly asking.

It's not fun if you are trying to win. If you pay for fun you play to lose. To me it was always about relativley easy money. Most people did play for fun - I played to win. It wasn't hard to walk away with $40-60 per hour from small stakes. Small stakes was the easiest to win at as people play very very loose.

You have to learn how each specific player plays; I knew people by username and I knew who was serious and who was just there to burn through his nightly $20. Pretty much everyone not playing for fun was running analyzers that tracked your mathematical odds and yeah you played 4-6 games simultaneously if you wanted to make any money as you folded at least 75% of your hands. It was "work" but easy work.

Interesting, so it seems to be as I suspected: just a way to take advantage of people who are just casually joining games less prepared than you. I don't mean that disrespectfully, you serve a purpose because you are there to help them have their "fun".

This is good news for personal liberty, but I don't understand the appeal of ONLINE poker. Without the ability to read other's faces it just comes down to a numbers game. And, since the players are using computers, couldn't they just run a background program to tell them exactly what moves would be the best odds? There is no work on the part of the player, is that any fun? If you didn't have access to these tools then why would you want to play online because you will be at a disadvantage? I'm honestly asking.

Yes, there's a spectrum of "assistance" programs out there, and each poker site has its own rules on what is allowed. Typically programs that simply aggregate post-hand data and display trends on a HUD or suchlike (That guy folds 90% of the time preflop, respect him if he gets in) are acceptable; programs that use screen scraping or memory injection to read current-hand info and give advice are not. Similarly, bots are generally disallowed as well. (Of course, the philosophical discussion about what constitutes "cheating" is a different matter altogether.) Even for the acceptable programs, there's quite a bit of skill involved in learning how the info from it can help your decisions. Also, many online poker players play multiple tables at once; ironically, this tends to negate the assistance provided by third-party programs, as there's not enough time for deep analysis.

Quote:

Online gambling. The call for fools with money. There can never be any assurance that the software is "fair" unless you are a programmer and can read the source code, and do you really think the company is going to let you do that? It's all rigged. It is a program running on a server, and it is designed to make you lose money.

The game is designed to make all players, in aggregate, lose money. Highly skilled (or lucky) players can beat the odds, though. Given this, there's very little upside and significant downside for an online casino to rig the games. It HAS happened, but typically it's either a mid-level employee doing something for personal gain (which happens at live casinos too) or it's some tiny scam casino. A major casino won't do ANYTHING that even comes close to damaging their reputation.

Mr. Stout is sugarcoating things. Having a critical mass of players is important for tournaments, yes, but it's also important for following poker's Rule #0: If you want to win money, play with players who are worse then you.

I've played poker for over 40 years, all over the US, and have played millions of hands online as well. I'm a good player; excellent memory and math skills, and very good player and hand reading skills.

I make money, brick and mortar or online...doesn't matter. I do NOT use any tracking or assist tools; never have. I was smart/lucky enough to cash out of Full Tilt, PokerStars, and UB before UIGEA took effect and the fallout from that.

I belong to the PPA, and this is a good victory for US poker players. Other states will look at the tax revenue and adopt something similar. This is far less politically charged than marijuana legislation. Looking forward to being lazy again and gosh!, I'll save gas and help the environment.